Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Islamic Beliefs and Epistemic Defeaters: a Response to Baldwin and McNabb

  • Published:
Sophia Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this paper, I outline some exegetical and philosophical problems with Baldwin and McNabb’s epistemic defeater for Islamic beliefs. I maintain that their argument is based upon a misinterpretation of Quranic verses. I also argue that exceptional instances of divine deception inflicted upon the senses, if they indeed happen, should not undermine the general trust in our cognitive faculties. I conclude that virtually all Muslims are immune from Baldwin and McNabb’s proposed defeater and from the threat posed by divine deception in general.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Data Availability

Not applicable.

Code Availability

Not applicable.

Notes

  1. The translations quoted here are provided by the authors (Baldwin and McNabb 2019, 234).

  2. The translation quoted here is provided by the authors (Baldwin and McNabb 2015, 357).

  3. Unless stated otherwise, I depend on Muhammad Taqiuddin al-Hilali and Mohammad Muhsin Khan’s translation of the Qur’an.

  4. The Qur’an proclaims, on one occasion, that God sometimes deceives unfaithful people who seek to deceive (4:142). The authors’ argument, however, hinges on GD and GDF, neither of which is supported by this verse.

  5. Another typical example is one particular application of naskh (abrogation). Naskh in the Islamic literature indicates God’s annulment of a legal decree that was previously issued in the Scripture. Sometimes, the abrogation is done to the legal decree’s wording and content, sometimes to its content but not wording, and in other cases to its wording but not its content. On a few occasions, naskh has been applied to legal decrees that have yet to be fulfilled. Some Islamic scholars, hence, use these occurrences as examples of God commanding something that he does not want to be fulfilled (for more on naskh, see Hallaq 1999, 68–74).

References

  • Abu Hayyan. (2000). Al-Bahr al-Muheet fi al-Tafseer. Sudqi Mohammed Jameel (Ed.), Dar al-Fikr.

  • Al-Hilali, M., & Khan, M. (2020). Translation of the meaning of the noble Qur’an into the English language. King Fahad Glorious Qur’an Printing Complex.

  • Ali, A. Y. (2001). The meaning of the Holy Qur’an. Amana Publication.

    Google Scholar 

  • Al-Khattab, N. (2019). English translation of Musnad Imam Ahmad Bin Hanbal. Darussalam.

  • Al-Razi, M. (2000). Mafateeh al-Ghaib. Dar Ihya’ Al-turath al-Arabi.

  • Asad, M. (1992). The message of the Qur’an. Kazi Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baldwin, E., & McNabb, T. D. (2015). An epistemic defeater for Islamic belief? International Journal of Philosophy and Theology, 76(4), 352–367.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baldwin, E., & McNabb, T. D. (2019). Plantingian religious epistemology and world religions: Prospects and problems. The Rowman and Littlefield Publishing Group Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cuneo, T. (2016). Ritualized faith: Essays on the philosophy of liturgy. Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hallaq, W. B. (1999). A history of Islamic legal theories: An introduction to Sunni Usul Al-fiqh. Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ibn Atiyyah, A. (2002). Al-Muharrar al-Wajeez fi Tafseer al-Kitab al-Aziz. Abdulsalam Abdulshafi Mohammed (Ed.), Dar Al-Kutub Al-Ilmiyah.

  • Ibn Mandhur, M. (1994). Lisan al-Arab. Dar Sadir.

  • Khān, M. M. (1997). The translation of the meanings of Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī. Darussalam.

  • Pickthall, M. M. (2000). The meaning of the glorious Qur’an: An explanatory translation. Islamic Dawah Centre International.

  • Plantinga, A. (1993). Warrant and Proper Function. Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Plantinga, A. (2002). Introduction: The evolutionary argument against naturalism. In J. Beilby (Ed.), Naturalism Defeated? (pp. 1–12). Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Siddiqui, A. (n.d.) Sahih Muslim. https://sunnah.com/muslim/introduction. Accessed 15 January 2021.

  • Wielenberg, E. J. (2014). Divine deception. In T. Dougherty & J. McBrayer (Eds.), Skeptical Theism: New Essays (pp. 236–249). Oxford University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Cultural Studies, College of Sharia and Islamic Studies, Qassim University, Buraydah, Saudi Arabia

    Nader A. Alsamaani

Authors
  1. Nader A. Alsamaani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Not applicable.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nader A. Alsamaani.

Ethics declarations

Ethics Approval

Not applicable.

Consent to Participate

Not applicable.

Consent for Publication

Not applicable.

Competing Interests

Not applicable.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Alsamaani, N.A. Islamic Beliefs and Epistemic Defeaters: a Response to Baldwin and McNabb. SOPHIA 61, 445–456 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11841-021-00866-0

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11841-021-00866-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation